The Views of Psychologists, Lawyers, and Judges on Key Components and the Quality of Child Custody Evaluations in Australia The research reported in this study was in part funded by a grant from the Psychology Council of NSW. The opinions expressed by the authors do not necessarily reflect any opinion or policy of the Psychology Council of NSW

This study aimed to understand the expectations of and the agreement between professional groups regarding the quality of single-expert reports written by psychologists (known as child custody evaluations in the United States). 13 psychologists, 18 family lawyers, 26 children's lawyers, and 8 judges (N=65) in New South Wales, Australia, rated the overall quality of reports and the quality of various components of them. Interprofessional congruence on importance ratings allowed key components to be derived. The results revealed that the overall quality of reports was rated positively, however, significant discrepancies were found between importance and quality ratings on the various components, indicating that reports fall short of expectations in many areas.Key Points for the Family Court Community:Expert reports (child custody evaluations) written by psychologists are valued documents in assisting Judges making child custody decisions.There has been little research into the quality of reports written in family law proceedings.This study found that reports were rated as satisfactory or better by judges and lawyers.Psychologists rated report quality much higher than did legal professionals.The study provides a list of key components that are deemed important inclusions in reports to improve their usefulness.Areas in need of improvement are identified for research and training.